Ep55 - Not answer... I turned to its stakeholders

Yesterday, I presented the Memorial that I sent to Eni’s new leadership on October 19, 2009.

After eight years of trying to be heard, I reconstructed in ten pages what had happened to me at AGIP do Brasil and once again placed the facts before the company’s highest governance bodies.

After all, the Board of Directors represents the highest expression of "Corporate Governance" and also serves as a "Guardian of Ethics", helping to establish and oversee the organization’s ethical tone.

I explained the irregularities I had reported.

My dismissal just weeks later.

The investigations and departures that followed.

The labor proceedings.

And the professional and personal consequences I was already facing.

I did this because I believed that a new leadership deserved the opportunity to examine the documents and reach its own conclusions.

But Eni did not respond.

Faced with yet another silence, I had to make a decision.

If those responsible for the company’s governance were unwilling to examine my case or even respond to my MEMORIAL, I would turn to those who also had a legitimate interest in knowing how Eni’s publicly stated ethical commitments were being applied in practice:

🔹 its stakeholders.

I then began sending communications about my case to Eni’s stakeholders, including its major shareholders - among them its largest shareholder, the Italian government.

I presented myself not only as a former executive of Eni’s Brazilian subsidiary, but also as CEO of the Instituto Brasileiro de Ética nos Negócios (Brazilian Institute for Business Ethics), an organization I founded after everything I had experienced.

My message had one central point:

📌 in my case, I believed Eni’s conduct did not correspond to the principles the company itself proclaimed in its Code of Ethics.

I was not asking stakeholders to accept my version.

I was putting before them a question that Eni’s own governance had left unanswered:

🔴 What should happen when an employee reports irregularities in accordance with the Code of Ethics, is dismissed weeks later, and for years asks the company to examine the documents?

My objective remained the same:

🔹 an independent investigation.

A response based on the documents.

And, if the facts were confirmed, corrective action capable of restoring my name, image, and reputation.

After years of trying to resolve the matter through institutional channels, I had reached out to the stakeholders.

And this time, Eni would react.

Not with the independent investigation I had expected.

In 2010, the company took legal action against me and against the Brazilian Institute for Business Ethics.

That is the next chapter of this story.


❎ Learn more:

1️⃣ 2009 Memorial to ENI:
🔹 Italian
🔹 English

2️⃣ Chronology of Facts for the Reconstruction of Events